weird thought

  • Thread starter Thread starter kothdvideo
  • Start date Start date
K

kothdvideo

what would happen if you connected an external usb/firewire drive to 2
computers at the same time?. One through usb & the other through the
firewire. But you only tried to access the drive from one computer at
a time.

Guess one way to know is to try. Can't see any real physical damage
being done but thought I'd check with the experts first.

happy holidays
 
Previously kothdvideo said:
what would happen if you connected an external usb/firewire drive to 2
computers at the same time?. One through usb & the other through the
firewire. But you only tried to access the drive from one computer at
a time.
Click to expand...
Guess one way to know is to try. Can't see any real physical damage
being done but thought I'd check with the experts first.
Click to expand...

Likely the interface brought up first will work and the other
will not. If it is a bad design it will mix commands and can do
arbitrary damage to the data on your disks. It can also get
physically damaged, if its cooling is only sufficient to operate
one interface (unlikely) or if it is interface powerd (also
unlikely, since the interfaces should be decoupled). In the second
case a very bad and cheap design could also damage the interfaces in
both computers.

Arno
 
Arno Wagner said:
Likely the interface brought up first will work and the other
will not.
Click to expand...
My first thought. Lock out the other guy. But.....
If it is a bad design it will mix commands and can do
arbitrary damage to the data on your disks.
Click to expand...
Then I'm a winner. I'd be prepared for that as I investigated.
It can also get physically damaged, if its cooling is only sufficient to operate
one interface (unlikely) then no worries
or if it is interface powerd (also >unlikely, since the interfaces should be decoupled). no worries

In the second case a very bad and cheap design could also damage the interfaces in
both computers.
Click to expand...
oh, oh, was with you till then!!
guess I'll try & report back. the lord hates a coward.
Arno
Click to expand...
mrc
 
Arno Wagner said:
Well, I am not religious. But good luck anyways.
Arno
Click to expand...

Performed as expected. Once an interface is "up" it locks out the
other. Oh well.
But my real problem is transfering lots of big files (gigs) between a
P3 workhorse & a P4 (with main storage). Both machines are 100Mbps
networked and on the same desk, using a kvm switch to manage.
The files start out on the P3, then get "slowly" (3.6MBps) moved to
the P4.
So I see I have two choices.
1. Faster Network. then..
Put the files on the P4 & have the P3 use them. If that is problematic
then process on P3 & transfer them as before, only faster.
So build a gigabyte or a firewire 800 network. Any big difference or
should I be driven by cost?
2. USB switch
and set up a couple of drives to flip flop.
any guidance?
thanks
happy holidays
mrc
 
Performed as expected.
Yep.

Once an interface is "up" it locks out the other. Oh well.
Click to expand...
But my real problem is transfering lots of big files (gigs) between a
P3 workhorse & a P4 (with main storage). Both machines are 100Mbps
networked and on the same desk, using a kvm switch to manage.
The files start out on the P3, then get "slowly" (3.6MBps) moved to
the P4.
So I see I have two choices.
1. Faster Network. then..
Put the files on the P4 & have the P3 use them. If that is problematic
then process on P3 & transfer them as before, only faster.
So build a gigabyte
Click to expand...

gigabit, actually.
or a firewire 800 network. Any big difference
Click to expand...

The gigabit network is rather more standard.
or should I be driven by cost?
Click to expand...

the firewire network would be free if both PCs have it already.
2. USB switch and set up a couple of drives to flip flop.
Click to expand...

Thats not going to be as fast as a direct connection between the PCs.
any guidance?
Click to expand...

Try the firewire network if both PCs have that already. XP supports that fine.
 
Performed as expected. Once an interface is "up" it locks out the
other. Oh well.
But my real problem is transfering lots of big files (gigs) between a
P3 workhorse & a P4 (with main storage). Both machines are 100Mbps
networked and on the same desk, using a kvm switch to manage.
The files start out on the P3, then get "slowly" (3.6MBps) moved to
the P4.
So I see I have two choices.
1. Faster Network. then..
Put the files on the P4 & have the P3 use them. If that is problematic
then process on P3 & transfer them as before, only faster.
So build a gigabyte or a firewire 800 network. Any big difference or
should I be driven by cost?
2. USB switch
and set up a couple of drives to flip flop.
any guidance?
Click to expand...

Definitely faster network. You can get resonable Gigabit network cards
for about 10 Euro/USD. I recently bough some SURECOM EP-320G-TX. Not
the fastest, about 500Mbps in TCP streaming with netperf, but you
cannot that much more with PCI either. If you have just two cards you
can connect them directly without crossover cable.

You still have the choice of transferring or exporting. I would
not use Firewire for the network. GbE is a more "generic" solution
and likely cheaper and more reliable.

Incindetialy it is my observation that for a long time the
RTL-chip fammily of network cards are the cheapest and among
the most reliable. On the other hand 3com is the most expensive
and by far the worst quality I ever saw in networking equipment.

Arno
 
Arno Wagner said:
Definitely faster network. You can get resonable Gigabit network cards
for about 10 Euro/USD. I recently bough some SURECOM EP-320G-TX. Not
the fastest, about 500Mbps in TCP streaming with netperf, but you
cannot that much more with PCI either.
Click to expand...

yeh, PCI enters the equation. Guess it's only positive if it drives
the problem to a remedial situation. Either a network issue or a
non-network issue - hardware, software or os. Points us in the right
direction. Cost/benefit.. My needs are simple.
If you have just two cards you can connect them directly without crossover cable.
Click to expand...

no - nobody (P3 or P4) has 1394b support. and nobody has gig ethernet
support/cards either. So guess crossover connectivity is best bet,
unless pairing stipulates otherwise. Either with firewire or gig
network. then try & figure out to get the wfles wifi back on the grid.
but not adverse to sneakernet!
You still have the choice of transferring or exporting.
Click to expand...
Under native xp pro & w98se machine? that would be fine. In a press i
can admin from xp machine (kvm) if required. Always seems xp sees more
thsn it broadcasts.
I would not use Firewire for the network. GbE is a more "generic" solution
and likely cheaper and more reliable.
Click to expand...

noticed & appreciated. So it's just a cost issue. thx
Incindetialy it is my observation that for a long time the
RTL-chip fammily of network cards are the cheapest and among
the most reliable. On the other hand 3com is the most expensive
and by far the worst quality I ever saw in networking equipment.
Click to expand...

oh, tell me more

best regards
mrc
 
kothdvideo said:
Performed as expected. Once an interface is "up" it locks out the
other. Oh well.
But my real problem is transfering lots of big files (gigs) between a
P3 workhorse & a P4 (with main storage). Both machines are 100Mbps
networked and on the same desk, using a kvm switch to manage.
The files start out on the P3, then get "slowly" (3.6MBps)
Click to expand...

Where's the bottleneck? Don't assume that it's the network, find out.
That's about a third of the bandwidth of 100TX.
 
J. Clarke said:
Where's the bottleneck? Don't assume that it's the network, find out.
That's about a third of the bandwidth of 100TX.
Click to expand...

3.6 MBps or 36 Mbps
isn't that ok for a 100Mbps network? though you didn't acheive
anywhere near 100%. albeit a dedicated 2 machine network.
 
kothdvideo said:
3.6 MBps or 36 Mbps
isn't that ok for a 100Mbps network? though you didn't acheive
anywhere near 100%. albeit a dedicated 2 machine network.
Click to expand...

It's very poor actually. I'm typically getting 50-80 Mb/sec on
consumer-grade 100TX hardware with no attempt at tuning. That's for the
network itself, from entry to TCP/IP stack to exit from TCP/IP stack and
does reflect both Ethernet and TCP/IP overhead. If you're getting 36 with
the network being the bottleneck your network is broken.
 
3.6 MBps or 36 Mbps
isn't that ok for a 100Mbps network? though you didn't acheive
anywhere near 100%. albeit a dedicated 2 machine network.
Click to expand...

It is a bit slow. Even with TCP you should get 70Mbps or so
unless you have historic half-duplex infrastructure or
your OS or application has substandard network capabilities.

Pesonally GbE is so cheap, that it is worhwhile trying to
try it before an exact analysis. After all, even if there is
another bottlenech and you remove it, you will not more than
about double the sepeed with FE.

Arno
 
Back
Top